shep854 Posted April 5, 2017 Share Posted April 5, 2017 http://taskandpurpose.com/navy-futuristic-aircraft-carrier-uss-gerald-ford/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tp-today&utm_content=image "The USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), America’s futuristic new aircraft carrier, will finally hit the open water for sea trials this week, the Navy confirmed to Business Insider."The ship and crew have already completed a pier side dry run of operations in Newport News, Virginia, and will hit the seas later this week to test out its most basic functions." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted April 5, 2017 Share Posted April 5, 2017 Looks like a good class. Haven't seen the kind of criticism about it like some of the other new naval ship classes have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalkre Posted April 5, 2017 Share Posted April 5, 2017 Looks like a good class. Haven't seen the kind of criticism about it like some of the other new naval ship classes have.Is that true? I was reading something the other day (I thought on here but not finding it atm) discussing all the issues with the class (basically 'designing it as they build it'). I don't follow Navy issues that closely so I don't know if the issues were specific to the Ford or more of the same for the Navy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Estes Posted April 5, 2017 Share Posted April 5, 2017 Now that we have run out of presidents remotely acceptable or suitable for ship naming, is this the end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim the Tank Nut Posted April 5, 2017 Share Posted April 5, 2017 Enterprise, Hornet, Yorktown, Saratoga, Lexington, even Langley would be better than ANY President's name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted April 5, 2017 Share Posted April 5, 2017 Looks like a good class. Haven't seen the kind of criticism about it like some of the other new naval ship classes have.Is that true? I was reading something the other day (I thought on here but not finding it atm) discussing all the issues with the class (basically 'designing it as they build it'). I don't follow Navy issues that closely so I don't know if the issues were specific to the Ford or more of the same for the Navy. I can't say for sure. The carrier class has somehow been spared from the typical TN scrutiny treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shep854 Posted April 5, 2017 Author Share Posted April 5, 2017 I've read that were issues with the new electro-magnetic catapults. Since this is a brand new tech application, that should not be too surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rickard N Posted April 5, 2017 Share Posted April 5, 2017 Is Oriskany off limits? /R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kennedy Posted April 5, 2017 Share Posted April 5, 2017 Enterprise, Hornet, Yorktown, Saratoga, Lexington, even Langley would be better than ANY President's name. There should certainly always be an Enterprise, Hornet, Yorktown and Saratoga. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shep854 Posted April 6, 2017 Author Share Posted April 6, 2017 (edited) CVN-80 will be named Enterprise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(CVN-80)CVN-79 will be John F. Kennedy Edited April 6, 2017 by shep854 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Estes Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Before we resurrect Hornet and Saratoga [an IJN submarine torpedo magnet for most of the critical part of the war], we need to have a new Lexington. If we factor in the performance of WWII air groups with their carriers, we should equate Enterprise and Yorktown. Just ask our fellow TNetter, RLeonard, if in doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Estes Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 (edited) Ack, double post. This space for rent. Edited April 6, 2017 by Ken Estes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Plenty of good names out there. USS Ark Royal for example.Im just saying.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvanDP Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Considering the shortages of hulls and the modern love of synergy and branding I suggest: General George C. Thurgood/Thorogood Marshall That way we honor a General, a Justice and a Bluesman all in one shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunday Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 With a new Kaga just commissioned, the Japanese only need to launch new Hiryu, Akagi, Zuikaku and Shokaku to justify Saratoga, Yorktown and Hornet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 I'd have to say that I like the sound of "USS Lexington, USS Saratoga, JS Kaga, and JS Akagi to participate in joint-training between the USN and JMSDF". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shep854 Posted April 6, 2017 Author Share Posted April 6, 2017 Considering the original concept and designation of carriers in the US Navy was an 'aircraft carrying cruiser-- CV=Cruiser (C) Fixed-wing aircraft (V), the Japanese designation of their carriers as 'destroyers' makes a bit of (whimsical) sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivanhoe Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 If we are to reprise the "major American battles" naming scheme, I suggest "USS Super Bowl LI." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnm Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 If you're out of presidents you can go with the VPs. USS Quayle for a start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 USS Joe Biden??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 No love for Spiro Agnew? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Plenty of good names out there. USS Ark Royal for example.Im just saying....Will have to admit, Her Majesty's Navy had some impeccable aircraft carrier names. The Glorious class and the Illustrious class come to mind first. Also some majestic battleship names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Im glad to see a Prince of Wales again. Queen Elizabeth, im not mad about naming a warship after a cruiser liner, but still... FuriousGloriousHermesBulwarkArk RoyalEagleIllustriousInvincible So many good names, so little money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunday Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 USS Joe Biden??? Guaranteed to provoke WWIII, at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urbanoid Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 As a result of some gaffe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now